Dear Colleagues,
Thank you for your suggestions. I do agree with Terrence Love, and share a similar concern in distinguishing systems approach from cybernetics at least in regard to their conceptual framework.
Since most of the literature on interaction design employ an analytical approach(Bush's Memex and other HCI propositions. ), it would be a good idea to also turn to cybernetics in order to highlight the non-linearity, complexity and fuzziness of systems. I'd like to thank you for your kind contributions.
I see the proposed course as "Interaction Design Theory". That's why I'm considering to also refer to cognitive psychology and human behavior in order to deal with human activity such as problem solving, learning, group dynamics etc..
Best Regards.
Etkin Ciftci, Adj. Prof.
Faculty of Communications, Kadir Has University
=====================================
PhD Cand. Dept. of Industrial Product Design
Istanbul Technical University (ITU)
On Jan 14, 2011, at 4:29 AM, Terence Love wrote:
> Hi Ranulph,
> Thanks for the info.
> I've never seen much difference between cybernetics and systems except in
> individuals' claims for territory and status.
> Cybernetics and Systems model the same situations in the same ways. The
> underlaying concepts, reasoning and maths are usually identical. They are
> both useful for design contexts that designers have been particularly weak
> at addressing.
> Have you some way of differentiating between them?
> Terry
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and related
> research in Design [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ranulph
> Glanville
> Sent: Thursday, 13 January 2011 10:10 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Syllabus for Interaction Theory
>
> Stafford Beer and Gordon Pask were close friends and collaborators. They
> worked on chemical computers in tandem, and also on Pask's famous "ear" (not
> to be confused with Stellarc's).
>
> These were fascinating people and they did fantastic work. Indeed,
> cybernetics is enormously relevant to this group-far more so than systems.
> However, I'll keep my enthusiasm to myself here, and not let it run away
> with me.
>
> Ranulph
|